⁵⁴⁷³

Friday, 24 May 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, we only have limited time this morning but I only took one hour and 17 minutes with this witness in chief yesterday. I'll be very anxious to start the witness K5. In order to do so, I will have to summon him now because he's some distance away. It would be helpful to know if the Court has any preliminary views as to how much cross-examination time will be allowed to the accused.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Since the witness isn't here -- I must say the Trial Chamber are doubtful if he's added very much to our store of information so far all with respect to the previous witness. Perhaps the Prosecution might like to consider how necessary it is to call --

MR. NICE: I think he is the last witness of this particular category and a full-out important part of the story but, Your Honour, yes, I take the point.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you can have until the adjournment for cross-examination of this witness. Bear in mind what I've said, that we've heard much of this information before, and we're not going to be assisted by argument about political matters. You've heard what our views about those things are and the relevance of it and the relevance of the evidence.

Let's have the witness, please. ⁵⁴⁷⁴

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Have I understood you correctly? You're limiting my cross-examination of this witness too to one and a half hours, in fact; is that right?

JUDGE MAY: You've already had seven minutes, so it will be something in the order of one hour, 40 minutes, yes.

[The witness entered court]

WITNESS: ADNAN MEROVCI [Resumed]

[Witness answered through interpreter] Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]

Q. You said in 1990, that you lost your job. However, the bank you worked in went bankrupt that same year, 1990; is that right?

A. That's not right.

Q. You yourself said that it was the process of liquidation. It's the expression you yourself used meaning bankruptcy.

A. After the constitutional changes, the Serbian regime wanted to have its control over the whole Kosova economy. That was with bank full rights in all the community of the banks of the former Yugoslavia. It had the right to have its foreign relations. It had its own swift code. It was an economic institution with full rights. And I was never told of any bankruptcy or something similar. You can verify that looking at its statements and balance sheets.

Q. Let us not waste time on this so as not to waste time as to what authority the bank had. There's no dispute that the bank operated in accordance with the rules and that it was authorised to work, but I'm talking about something else. When a bank ceases to be capable of ⁵⁴⁷⁵ fulfilling its obligations, it goes into receivership. You yourself said that in your statement.

Do you know that the legal consequences, according to the law, of process of receivership is the secession of employment of the staff, and during that process only a minimum number of staff members are kept employed until the process is completed?

A. Let's suppose for a moment that you are right. How, then, can you explain that no single Serb was laid off in the course of this process?

Q. I don't believe that.

JUDGE MAY: This is presumably something that we can find out from documentation as to whether the bank did go into liquidation or not.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that you are quite right, because at least as far as banks are concerned, everything can be found in documents. As for the liquidation of the bank, that is even stated in the witness's statement on page 4, paragraph 3. But let us move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In your statement, on page 2, paragraph 6, you say that the Albanians worked together with the Serbs and all of them got on very well. How is it possible that when, only a couple of lines up, you said that the Serbs and Albanians hated each other?

A. There was a minimum professional relationship at work, and this minimum relationship was based on the goodwill of the majority of the Albanians.

Q. So this atmosphere of good relationship was not based on the goodwill of the Serbs working there? ⁵⁴⁷⁶

A. I already gave the answer to that question.

Q. Very well. You spoke about the constitutional amendments of 1989. Were the Albanians satisfied with the constitutional provisions envisaged by the 1974 constitution, those provisions that you objected to being changed in 1989? Were they satisfied with the amendment to the constitution made in 1974?

A. They were not fully satisfied, and this could be seen from the peaceful protests that were organised in 1981.

Q. The demand at those demonstrations was a republic for Kosovo, was it not?

A. Yes, that's true, and the protests of 1981 paved the first steps to democracy in Europe.

Q. And according to 1974 constitution, was Kosovo a component part of the territory of the Republic of Serbia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

A. I'm not in a position to speak about it as an expert, but I can say that Kosova was part of Serbia and a constituent part of the former Yugoslav Federation, with a right to veto.

Q. So Kosovo was a part of Serbia, wasn't it?

JUDGE MAY: No. Let us not get into argument. He has given his answer. As far as it's a matter of law, we will be able to determine it, and there's no point arguing with the witness about it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I didn't consider this to be an argument.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁵⁴⁷⁷

Q. Do you still consider Kosovo to be a part of Serbia?

JUDGE MAY: Irrelevant.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. You mentioned the 1981 demonstrations. Do you know that after those demonstrations in 1981, until the end of the 1980s, more than 50.000 Serbs and Montenegrins left Kosovo? Yes or no, please.

A. No.

Q. And do you know that even before those demonstrations, in the period from 1968 up to then, under pressure, more than 30.000 Serbs left Kosovo, up to 1981? Do you know that?

A. Pressure against the Serbs was a political term, and it represented a notorious syndrome against the Albanians, as if allegedly the Serb women were violated and Serb cemeteries were destroyed, and so on. In fact, that was not the truth. There were also demonstrations staged by Belgrade aimed at discrediting the Albanians.

Q. So that means that the pressure on the Serbs was made up and that these 50.000 up to 1981 and 30.000 after 1981 left Kosovo because of fabricated pressures; is that what you're claiming?

A. I said that the figures are not correct.

Q. And is the phenomenon correct?

A. They were fabricated phenomena by the regime, by the Serb regime.

Q. And is it correct that in police patrols that were introduced after 1981, that those patrols were composed of Albanians and Serbs, that they were always ethnically mixed patrols?

A. After the protests and demonstrations, against which violence was ⁵⁴⁷⁸ used by the regime, I mean the peaceful demonstrations for the establishment of democracy, the police patrol were wearing uniforms which were not seen until then. They used to patrol in groups of threes, where in all cases they were two Serbs and one Albanian.

Q. So the patrols were mixed, consisting of Albanians and Serbs?

A. I gave you my answer to that question.

Q. You said that you had no reason to care particularly for the Serbs and that the Albanians were brought up to be cautious with the Serbs and that that applied to you as well.

A. After that period, the Albanians were hindered in every possible way, and they didn't enjoy their natural rights.

Q. That is not what I'm talking about. I am referring to your statement that you had no reason to care in particular for the Serbs and that the Albanians were brought up to be cautious with the Serbs and that that was your case as well. Let me read out what you said in your statement.

"I saw no reason to care for them, and the Albanians were brought up to be cautious with the Serbs and that was the case with me. I was always very cautious in all business dealings and contacts with them." Why should a child be brought up to be cautious with another child because that child is a Serb?

A. We did not respect them, but we accepted them.

Q. Very well. I'll leave out some questions because of the limited time I have at my disposal.

This again is linked to your statement. You said on page 3, ⁵⁴⁷⁹ paragraph 2, that after Vllasi's arrest, the Serbs started returning to Kosovo in large numbers.

Where were the Serbs returning from to Kosovo? And when you say that they started returning, I assume you mean that prior to that they had left Kosovo. If that is so, tell me the reason why they had left Kosovo.

A. There was a special programme in place for the "return of the Serbs" to Kosova. I do not rule out the possibility that for special demographic reasons the Serbs may have left Kosova, but there was an opinion that was ultra political, a tendentious opinion, of altering the ethnic structure of the Albanians. I can argue this by the fact that the Serbs were treated in a -- the Serbs had maintained an irrational attitude towards Albanians.

Q. If they started coming back, they could only have started coming back if before that they had left. Isn't that right?

A. I already explained that there was a call for them to return, but it was another problem to keep them there.

Q. In your statement, on page 3, paragraph 2, you said that I had proposed certain measures and constitutioned changes whereby the status of the autonomous province would be abolished. Is it true that prior to those constitutional amendments delegates of the Kosovo Assembly, mostly Albanians, on the 23rd of March, 1989, voted in favour of the amendments to the constitution of Serbia? Is that right or not?

A. The constitutional many amendments were put forward for public debate, and all those citizens who had the possibility to express their views, they did so, but most of the people opposed these amendments, ⁵⁴⁸⁰ proposed moments. But the outcome of the debate was never taken into consideration. An assembly was held under extraordinary measures. The Assembly Chamber was surrounded by -- in the Assembly Chamber there were state security officers. The building itself was surrounded by forces, by police forces, and during the vote, people who were not supposed to be there, not members of the Assembly, cast their votes.

Q. Are you trying to say that the Assembly did not vote in favour of the amendments to the constitution? Just with a yes or no, please, so that we can move on.

A. Repeat the question.

Q. Are you trying to say that the Kosovo Assembly did not pass the constitutional amendments on the date I mentioned? Yes or no?

A. I haven't come to say what I want but what is the truth, as I swore at the beginning, and the truth is that the constitutional amendments were approved under the circumstances that I said, and it was the same Assembly that proclaimed the constitutional declaration for independence the following year.

Q. That, of course, is not true, but we'll not dwell on that. In 1990, your party considered that it should take part in the elections in Serbia, but you did not expect to get more than 15 seats in parliament, the number that you had in the People's Assembly of Serbia up to then; is that right?

A. I was thinking of the Assembly as an institution, even though it was of a different composition. And you must repeat the question, please. ⁵⁴⁸¹

Q. I am now asking you something else, because what you just said is not true, and there are documents to corroborate that. I was saying that in 1990, your party felt that it should take part in the elections in Serbia, but you estimated that you would not win more than 15 seats in the People's Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, the same number that you had until then. Is that true?

A. It's not true, because in the programme of the largest party that was created at that time, there was the option of Kosova as a republic equal to other republics in the former Yugoslavia.

Q. Very well. As you're claiming that that is not correct, I have here data provided in the documents supplied by the opposing party, disclosed by the other party. Rugova, on the platform of the Democratic Alliance of Kosovo, number 03037052, and the English version is K021410, saying that on the 6th of September, 1990, during the registration of your party in the Federal Secretariat for Justice, the president of your party, Mr. Rugova, declared in a statement for Oslobodenje in Sarajevo that: "Participation in the elections in Serbia would not give us anything more than we already have, that is 15 delegates in the Assembly, but still we have to prepare for the elections in Kosovo, maybe in Serbia, and in Yugoslavia well."

So let me repeat the question. Had you intended to take part in the elections or not in view of these statements made by your party leader?

A. After the enforced constitutional decision -- changes in 1989, Kosova was swept up with a wave of protests because the constitutional ⁵⁴⁸² changes also meant the Albanians losing their rights de jure in contrast to the trends in Europe and in Yugoslavia where the democratisation was on the way.

Q. Will you please answer my question? My question is whether this is right or not.

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer. The question was: Had you decided to take part in the elections?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In its programme, the LDK articulated political demands. The aim of the LDK was to channel the political demands of the people, and the part of this programme was the Kosova Republic. That was an option. But what you are claiming is not true.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What I cited was stated a year and a half after the constitutional changes based on a document disclosed by the other party. So a year and a half after that.

JUDGE MAY: Let us put the matter to the witness. You've heard what it said, Mr. Rugova said on the 6th of September. Now, can you help about that, about taking part in the elections or preparing for the elections?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Which elections do you mean?

JUDGE MAY: You heard what was read out. Read it out again, please, Mr. Milosevic. The witness doesn't seem to have taken it in.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was never any question of ⁵⁴⁸³ taking part in the elections for the Serbian parliament, and this is not true.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. You said that emergency measures were introduced. Is it true that they were introduced by the Presidency of Yugoslavia because the order was threatened in Kosovo, the integrity of the country, and was at that time the Presidency headed by a Muslim, Raif Dizdarevic. Yes or no?

A. The measures that you mentioned were military measures, compulsory measures, and everything was done at the -- on the barrel of a gun even though the situation was as you say. Even though the person you said was indeed president.

Q. Yes. But those measures were introduced by that Presidency. Yes or no?

A. Yes.

Q. You and the president of your party, when Rugova was allegedly elected president of Kosovo, you threatened, on the international stage, that the strategy of your party would be radicalised if the international community continues to ignore your demands. Is that true or not? Just yes or no, please.

A. No.

Q. May I perhaps refresh your memory by saying that in a document provided by the other party, in the English version, K040197, says that the president of your party, in 1992, on the 25th of August, in Der ⁵⁴⁸⁴ Standard, in Vienna, declared:

"Our main demand is independence for Kosovo, and if they continue to ignore us, we cannot guarantee that the people will not opt for a more radical strategy."

Is that true or not?

A. That is true.

Q. And is it true that behind this demand for independence, there was a plan for unification with Albania?

A. That's not true, but it is true that there existed a political platform with three options, presented by Mr. Rugova in his own evidence. If you wish, I can repeat it.

Q. Let me remind you of a document again disclosed by the other party, K0214092. Rugova stated that the borders of Kosovo, between Kosovo and Albania, is unnatural, it's like a Berlin Wall; that the border has divided the Albanians; and that this was in connection with an award of the Foundation for Human Rights of the US Congress, and that the award can be seen as the green light for the unification of Kosovo and Albania. Do you remember that statement?

A. Dr. Rugova led a peaceful policy recognised internationally, and in every statement of his, changing borders was presented as a matter of European integration. And indeed, even if all the Albanian territories in the Balkans were united, we would have a single state with the fewest national minorities in the world.

Q. And do you know about the norms of the international community and the Helsinki Act on the unchangeability of borders in Europe, frontiers in ⁵⁴⁸⁵ Europe? Do you consider that that is contrary to the European position that you refer to?

A. I'm not appealing to this. I'm merely announcing -- saying that the issue of changing borders, as you say, in the time about which we are talking, the policy was of -- the policy of Mr. Rugova and the majority of the people in Kosova was for Kosova as an independent state and a stabilising element in the Balkans, which was a good precondition for further European integration.

Q. And is it true that the plan for Kosovo to break off should have been realised in such a way that Kosovo would first of all come under international control, as a first step? Yes or no, according to your views.

A. Would you repeat this question, please?

Q. Do you know that the plan for Kosovos to secede should have been put into effect by considering that Kosovo should first come under international control?

JUDGE MAY: What is the plan you're talking about, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm talking about the plan for Kosovo to secede from Yugoslavia, or rather, from Serbia, and to become united with Albania.

JUDGE MAY: Which plan, or is it a notion of yours?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No. We're here in this cross-examination -- in the cross-examination of Mr. Rugova, we presented several documents from which this plan was evident, and the creation of a Greater Albania, so I'm asking -- ^{5486 BLANK PAGE 5487}

JUDGE MAY: That is what you claim. These things are merely alleged by you. Now, are you saying that this witness was a party to this alleged plan?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course. As --

JUDGE MAY: Very well. Were you party, Mr. Merovci, of a plan for the establishment of a Greater Albania? That is what is being suggested.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The LDK has its own statute and programme, and there was not a word about the unification of the Albanian lands in the Balkans. But I said that there is a political platform that, by agreement, all the territories in the former Yugoslavia inhabited by Albanians -- and this platform has three points. And for your information, I can repeat it for you, if you wish, but Dr. Rugova, in his own evidence, did put them forward.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. And do you remember Rugova's statement to Der Spiegel that the confederation with Albania is a question of the future? That is contained in the document that was disclosed by the opposing party.

A. The question of the future can never be prejudged.

Q. Now, in respect of this question - and you didn't give me an answer, at least the second part - the point is that this can be realised by the fact that Kosovo should first come under international control. Let me refresh your memory. In Rugova's interview to the Budapest Daily, he said that the secession of Kosovo could be realised if Kosovo was demilitarised and if it came under international protection. That is the ⁵⁴⁸⁸ English version of K02140118, paragraph 4. It is the interview he gave and it is presented in the documents. Is that right or not?

A. I said before -- and, Your Honour, you spoke of a plan which did not in fact exist. As far as I'm concerned, I have a very good memory. I remember very well everything.

Q. All right. Very well. Let's move on to another area, because there are documents to bear that out.

Now, you mention, on page 5, paragraph 4 of your statement, that the State Security interrogated you for several days, but on the occasion you say they did not take you into custody. Is that true?

A. That was for the first time in 1995, in the first half of 1995.

Q. Is it true that you were put in prison?

A. The first time, no.

Q. All right. We've clarified that. Now, yesterday you were saying that you were in prison for a period of six months. I don't know what it said in the transcript, how this was evidenced by the transcript. But then you said six weeks, and finally, from your testimony, it turned out that you were there for 16 days, because you were in illegal possession of weapons. Is that right or not?

A. I think this is speculation. Initially I was sentenced to one month of prison. I was released after 16 days, after I put in some -- paid some -- left some mortgage for that. Then afterwards I was released on probation. And the second-instance court revoked the decision, that ruling of the court, because it found it was groundless.

Q. So you were in prison for 16 days; right? ⁵⁴⁸⁹

A. Yes.

JUDGE MAY: That, in fairness to the witness, is what he said. He said, quite clearly, giving his evidence, that various sentences were passed, but he only spent that time in prison.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Well, yesterday it was six months, then all the rest. That's why I'm asking him.

JUDGE MAY: That was the sentences - he made clear - not the time that he spent in custody.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. You say that your brother paid somebody, and in fact, it was a guarantee, or rather, bail, provided by law in the criminal proceedings, and bail means that you have to guarantee, by money or property, that you will come to court when called. Is that right or not?

A. The way you formulate it is not correct. It's not that I paid money; I just offered a guarantee, that is, my house, as a guarantee for the bail.

Q. Bail isn't paid; it is given as a guarantee. So it was on the basis of that guarantee that you were released; is that right or not?

A. Yes, but that's not money, as you asked me earlier. I didn't pay any actual money.

Q. I'm very happy to hear that. Now, you claim that you don't believe that the KLA, in its day, sentenced Rugova to death; is that right?

A. Repeat the question, please.

Q. You claim that you do not believe that the KLA, in their day, ⁵⁴⁹⁰ sentenced Rugova to death at one point in time?

A. I'm absolutely sure that that is not the case. It is mere speculation.

Q. The fact that you don't believe this, does that mean that you're not sure? You say, "I don't believe." Does that mean that you're not sure?

A. I didn't say that I didn't believe it. I said I am sure about it.

Q. All right. And is it true that in 1998 you and Rugova concluded that it wasn't safe to travel around Kosovo, especially in the more remote areas?

A. This was true in the entire ten-year period. We were very cautious and didn't travel because of the dangers of an incident staged by Serbian military and police forces.

Q. All right. But is it correct that members of the army and MUP were not positioned in these remote places? And if the soldiers or members of the MUP weren't there, then who could have jeopardised Rugova's and your safety?

A. The Serbian army and police couldn't be in every house in Kosova, but to travel to these places you had to pass through dozens of checkpoints.

Q. As you're claiming this, is it correct that it was precisely the KLA, in the course of 1998 and the beginning of 1999, held under its control the remote areas of Kosovo and parts of Latsati [phoen]? Do you know about that? Is that correct?

A. The KLA indeed had various regions under its control, and to visit ⁵⁴⁹¹ these areas, as I said, you had to pass through dozens of checkpoints manned by the Serbian forces, and it was a state of war.

Q. You, therefore, did not go to these remote areas where the KLA were because you had to pass through the checkpoints and not because you were afraid of your security and safety in these remote areas; is that it?

A. No, because we were not scared of the KLA, because the KLA was an organised army, commanded, and was a product of your lack of readiness to solve the problems and to allow the Albanians to exercise their natural rights, and the KLA protected the people from the forces of the occupier.

Q. And how can somebody occupy his own territory?

A. I'm not a lawyer. I'm a witness from Kosova. And when natural rights are suspended by force, with the aid of the army, the police, and the destruction of institutions -- I must say that natural rights are the right to life, to education, freedom of thought and expression.

Q. I asked you how somebody could occupy their own territory. Can you answer that question or not?

JUDGE MAY: He's given the answer.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Let's move on to the next question then. Fine. Is it true that Rugova and Hill had a joint undertaking over the draft for a Kosovo agreement, a joint undertaking?

A. After your agreement with Holbrooke there was shuttle diplomacy, and the G15 and G5 groups were formed to introduce confidence-building measures, as they were called. As a result, these did not meet with success because of your failures to -- because of your refusal, and this ⁵⁴⁹² led to the international conference of Kosova.

Q. All right, Mr. Merovci. What I asked you was: Is it true that Rugova and Hill had a joint -- had a joint undertaking to draft an agreement for Kosovo?

A. What agreement are you talking about?

Q. The agreement on Kosovo. Let me refresh your memory and remind you.

In the document of the other side, it says that Rugova, in talking to Walker, said that: "We're working on Hill's draft. It is up to Hill to compile a new draft. Hill knows our demands. We're now waiting for Hill."

Therefore, they had a joint enterprise concerning this draft. Did they work together on it? Yes or no?

A. I must ask you again not to refresh my memory because my memory is entirely clear. My answer must be no.

Q. All right. For the record, this is English version 0085325 and 000826 paragraph 2. Let's move on anyway.

Is it true, in view of your previous statement about the KLA, is it true that your party and your president, the party president, Rugova, called the KLA extremists, referred to them as extremists? Is that right?

A. No.

Q. It says here in this document - and for the record the English version is 0085327 - it says: "Rugova, in talking to Walker, stated, `In Malisevo we have extremists. In Malisevo we have extremists, and we ⁵⁴⁹³ cannot forget that.'"

Is that true or not?

A. Not in any document or any public statement did Rugova ever call the KLA extremists. There were cases in which he called them patriots.

Q. All right. Let's not waste time. Let's move on. I quoted the passage to you.

Do you know why the Russian Ambassador, Mayorski, in Rambouillet did not place his signature to the Rambouillet agreement?

A. You can ask Mr. Mayorski about that.

Q. Very well. How many members of the Albanian delegation from Rambouillet travelled to Brussels to have a meeting there with Clark, the NATO commander?

A. As far as I know, about seven or eight.

Q. And who were they? Who -- which people went?

A. I can only mention Mrs. Edita Tahiri, who was present at this meeting.

Q. All right. And the other seven or six you can't remember. Did Clark tell them on the occasion that the Albanians should get off the streets because in a few days time they would be --

JUDGE MAY: He wasn't there.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but this fact is mentioned, that he was told -- that he told them to stay off the streets because they would be there in a few days' time.

JUDGE MAY: Do you know anything about that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't at this meeting, but it was ⁵⁴⁹⁴ interpreted to me it wasn't a matter of keeping off the streets but of being careful.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So they weren't told to go to Macedonia and Albania, yes or no, to get away from there?

A. It was not an idea to go away -- of -- it wasn't a matter of going away in any sense at all. And this was a warning to all the citizens of Kosova. Not only Albanians but everybody.

Q. Well, that's what I'm saying. I'm referring to all the citizens of Kosovo. Was it suggested that they should get away from Kosovo? Yes or no?

A. No, never.

Q. As -- as you've just said, you have a very nice opinion of the KLA. Give me a direct answer to this question: How many members of your party and immediate associates of Ibrahim Rugova were killed by the KLA after the war?

A. Not one.

Q. As I don't have time, let me just remind you, Hakim Meri [phoen] From Turicevac near Srbica, on the 2nd of November of 1999, was killed. Sejdo Koci, also a member of the LDK, president of the LDK in Srbica, in fact, the DSK, he said to the Koha Ditore, on the 11th of November, 1999, that the headquarters of the DSK in Decani, Malisevo were exposed to attacks, maltreatment, and killings. Shaban Manaj, the President of the DSK for Istog, disappeared on the 1st of August, 2000. Sonji Geci [phoen] from the village of Laus near Srbica shot members -- shot at members of ⁵⁴⁹⁵ DSK families and close associates of Rugova on the 1st of August, 2000. According to the reports --

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer. Let the witness answer. Do you know -- Mr. Merovci, do you know about these cases which have been read out to you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The people that were mentioned mostly are known to me, but it can't be proved with any evidence how they were killed. Work is being done in this direction as Dr. Rugova said in his evidence.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wasn't getting the interpretation at all. Something wasn't working. Or perhaps there was an interruption with my microphone. Everything seems to be on, though. I can hear you now. I can hear now, but I didn't get the interpretation of that last answer.

JUDGE MAY: You can read it on the transcript, but what it said is it can't be proved with any evidence how they were killed. Work is being done in this direction.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Ah, yes. I can see it. I've read it. I read it in the meantime. Let's not waste time.

Q. According to the AP report, on the 24th of November, Rugova said in Minoka [phoen] that all efforts should be invested, that the killers of Xhemail Mustafa, his associate, should be brought to justice. Do you remember that?

A. The late Xhemail Mustafa was killed, it's true, but it still hasn't been confirmed who committed this. ⁵⁴⁹⁶

Q. And what about his Ismet Raci, an official of the DSK and president of the Klina municipality on the 25th of April - the year is 2000 - who was buried in the village of Sicevo near Klina? Is it known who his killers were?

A. I know that he was killed, but I don't know who was behind his murder.

Q. Do you claim - and I haven't got the time to go through all the killings - that not even the killings of your activist representatives of municipal boards, prominent persons from your party, that it was not the KLA who was behind all these killings? Yes or no?

A. I said that the KLA came from the people, and the KLA never had bullets for Albanians.

Q. You don't know about the people killed, Albanians killed and kidnapped by the KLA in the course of 1997, 1998, and 1999; is that it?

JUDGE MAY: The witness is denying that. Now, we've been over there for some time.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. I have half an hour more. I'm looking at the clock. So it is within the time allotted me by you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. When the war began, you were in Kosovo. You will remember the conference, the press conference held in the house of Dr. Rugova at which you were present yourself, and as you will remember, Rugova said in his testimony here that there were Yugoslav, Turkish, Greek journalists and others. There were a lot of people there at the time. And there are ⁵⁴⁹⁷ minutes about that. And he says: "Here I am at home. I've been at home since I returned with my family from Paris. There was speculations that I had been killed or wounded. I say now from my home, not only to NATO but to all the international factors in the world, especially the United Nations, that they should cease the bombing of Yugoslavia immediately as well as that of Kosovo and Metohija. Negotiations and a peaceful solution to Kosovo is the only road forward. We are now thinking differently. This is not a good way to solve not only this problem but any other problem, and we've sobered up."

Do you remember that?

A. Yes, I do, as if it were yesterday. And I can state here that this was a conference, a news conference held in the presence of maximum seven armed policemen and soldiers in which Mr. Rugova, in not a single sentence or word, ever called for the stopping of NATO bombing. I have stated this even at earlier occasions, and I can state it today too. If there may be evidence to prove the opposite of what I said, I can still declare that I will always declare the truth and only the truth.

Q. All right. All right. That's very interesting, because you know that proof of this exists. There was a big press conference. But let's move on. You speak about the arrival of Rugova, of his coming to me, and his life was threatened at the time by Albanian terrorists. Is that correct?

A. Two things are not correct. First that the Albanians have never been terrorists in their history. They have never committed any murders ⁵⁴⁹⁸ in Belgrade or Skopje, but they have fought for their rights, their natural rights. And second, Mr. Rugova has never been threatened or endangered in any way by the Albanians.

Q. If he was not in any danger, why did he come to ask me to save him and his family and to send them somewhere away from Pristina and -- if it was not because of the terrorists?

A. Mr. Rugova and myself came to Belgrade without being a party to the decision that ordered us to come there, and there we didn't beg you or ask you to release us and save us from the danger, as you say, but just asked that if we are free, as you have alleged, you should let us leave Kosova because we felt endangered by the Serb police and military forces, paramilitary forces.

How can you explain the murder of Agani in this case?

Q. I was just going to ask you that, because he was one of the victims of terrorism in Kosovo. Have you finally established which of those groups killed Agani?

A. Part of what you are saying is true. He was killed by the Serb terrorists. And the reasons for his murder were because the distinguished late professor was the embodiment of this peaceful spirit, and he was participant in every process under way in Kosova in the last ten years.

Q. I personally regret very much the killing of Mr. Agani. I had occasion to meet him a couple of times. But are you claiming that he was not killed by Albanian terrorists?

A. You -- you are saying that you regret the fact that he was killed. I don't know that, but the fact is that he was not killed by the ⁵⁴⁹⁹ Albanians.

Q. And why are you saying that Serb policemen, when they allegedly entered by force into Rugova's house, insisted to talk to him? If he was under arrest, they could have spoken to him without asking you for that opportunity for a whole hour, simply to restrain him and talk to him. How could it have happened in that way if, as you claim, he was under arrest?

A. I said yesterday too that it was the 31st of March. It was midday. A police patrol came. They broke down two of Rugova's doors. One of them was a reinforced door. I went down and said to them that there are people here. And as I said yesterday, I raised both my hands up in the air, and they maltreated me for an hour because I told them that Mr. Rugova is here. But the police told me, "We came here to do our duty, and Rugova is the first man to ask for NATO intervention." Then I consulted someone, and they ordered me to bring down all the members of the family, and this is what we did. We all went down on the ground floor. We got together in a single room, all of us, where we were detained for four hours, without letting us do anything.

Q. And before that, you were beaten for an hour, according to what you said yesterday. Is that correct?

A. I said I was maltreated. And I am ashamed, in fact, of what happened in Kosova, considering what happened all over Kosova, to complain here and to say that I was maltreated for an hour.

Q. Yesterday you said, quite explicitly, that you were beaten for an hour, and the next day you came to a meeting with me. You confirmed now that it was on the 31st of March. On the 1st of April, you had a meeting ^{5500 BLANK PAGE 5501} with me. There were no traces on you. You didn't look like a person who had been beaten. How come that on that occasion you didn't take advantage of the meeting at my place to tell me that somebody had broken into your house by force, that you had been beaten, mistreated, and so on? On the contrary. You said that you were being protected by the police, that you were safe, and so on. Why didn't you complain then as to what had happened to you only a day prior to that?

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer.

A. In answer to your question why didn't I complain at the meeting with you when, in fact, as you allege, the police were protecting us, I don't know how you understand the meaning of the word "maltreatment." They spared my face, in fact, but in my body they beat me up with their rifle butts. And I don't understand even now why they didn't even kill me at all.

For your information, I'm not a man that complains easily. As I said, given the fact that what happened in Kosova, the atrocities perpetrated there, my complaint would be a trifle one. During my house detention, house arrest, we were engaged in a life-and-death struggle, and we could escape or could remain alive thanks to what I'm going to say: One, thanks to God; second, thanks to Rugova's calm and wisdom --

Q. [Previous translation continues] ... time.

A. -- thanks to international pressure; and lastly, thanks to my personal instincts.

Q. Very well. Fine. I think it is clear something terrible happened to you a day earlier. Then you and Rugova came to see me the next day. ⁵⁵⁰²

JUDGE MAY: That's a comment. He's answered it.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. So you claim that I said personally at the meeting on the 1st April that the operation against the KLA would soon be over and that after that there would be no need for large numbers of soldiers and policemen in Kosovo; isn't that right?

A. Yes, something like that.

Q. In your statement, you claim that I said to Rugova that we had to come to an agreement so that people could come back to Kosovo; isn't that right?

A. No.

Q. No? And Rugova said to you, when you, as his secretary, entered, together with my secretary, after our conversation - at least, that is what you said yesterday - that it should be said that we were in favour of a peaceful solution and political means. What else was said in that statement except our common aspiration towards a peaceful solution by political means?

A. It was a press release, and the word "peace" and "peaceful means" is a very abstract notion if it's not actually realised in practice, and the question of implementation rested with you.

Q. It is common knowledge what "peaceful means" are. Rugova himself gave you instructions to the effect of what was contained in the release, and that release was published, and you, as his secretary, and Milinovic as mine, drafted it in that way. You confirmed that yesterday, didn't you? ⁵⁵⁰³

A. It's not true. I did not participate, for any moment, in the drafting of that statement. I was called there by Mr. Rugova because he wanted to consult me and to gain some time, and I said to him that this is just a press statement and nothing more than that, and I told you that usually press releases are not signed. It was a formality, in fact. We just crossed out the word "Metohija" from the text, something which you agreed with.

Q. So you claim that Rugova agreed to sign the release because there was nothing harmful in it. That is what you said. And yesterday you explained that he told you, for a peaceful settlement, et cetera, that that is how the release should be drafted; isn't that so? Yes or no. Please say yes or no. We have very little time left, another 15 minutes.

A. When Mr. Rugova called me there, he had the written statement on his hand, and this refutes what you are saying, that I was a party to its drafting.

Q. I'm asking you about the contents. We're not trying to establish all the other details, even though what you said is not true. I'm just asking you about the contents. Yes or no, please, and we can move on.

A. This distinguished Chamber has the text of that statement. I don't deem it necessary to give an answer to this question.

Q. Very well. As it coincides what you said yesterday, that Rugova told you, you're claiming that Sainovic told you a number of times that you were free?

A. He told me sometimes just for appearance's sake.

Q. I don't understand that. If he said that you were free, and ⁵⁵⁰⁴ repeated those words each time, how then could you have been hostages, when he told you that you could go?

A. But the reality proved the opposite. At every moment of our talk with him, we asked him to release us. If we were free, then why were we not allowed, during the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, fifteenth day, to leave?

Q. He told you that you were free to go. Who prevented you from going? Did anyone prevent you from going, from leaving?

A. The Serb police and army prevented us, were under your command.

Q. So you wanted to leave and you tried to leave, but you were stopped by the police and the army; is that what you're claiming now?

A. At every moment, whenever we had an opportunity to communicate with someone, our only demand was to let us go, to let us -- to allow us to leave Kosova, because we felt in danger there and we couldn't live a normal life. I said earlier -- I recounted here the factors that accounted for our survival.

Q. Mr. Merovci, I understand. I just wanted to establish these things. Are you aware of Rugova's statement in Rome, in May, when you got there, that he wanted the presence of international forces to ensure the autonomy of Kosovo but not its independence? Are you aware of that? Just tell me yes or no, please.

A. Yes, I remember it very well, and he has never said what you are claiming now.

Q. Well, do you know that on the 9th of May -- the press is a public document, so we can easily check. Do you know that on the 9th of May, ⁵⁵⁰⁵ after talks with the Green Party in Brussels, Rugova emphasised again that the autonomy of Kosovo should be created within the framework of Yugoslavia? There's a Reuters report to that effect as well. Yes or no.

A. No.

Q. Very well. Is it correct that the leadership of your party in Rome, on the 6th of May - that too has been published - said that it was possible to negotiate autonomy with Milosevic, and Melini [phoen] were apparently surprised when they heard that he said that? Yes or no.

A. Present at every meeting -- I've been present at every meeting, and I've never heard Rugova say this.

Q. Very well. That is what the press carried. You're one of his closest associates. On the 6th of May, as registered again in the news, he stated, in Rome, that he left Kosovo to meet up with his associates and discuss the future of Kosovo, and that during his stay in Kosovo, he had many contacts with the authorities in Belgrade and discussed the possibilities of a political settlement and a climate of trust being established. Is that true?

A. No.

Q. Is it true that already on the 7th of May, following this statement, a spokesman for the KLA, Krasniqi, said that the leader of the Kosovar Albanians, Rugova, does not have the mandate to negotiate Kosovo problems? Is that true? Yes or no.

A. It was not like this. It was different. He said it was not true that an agreement had been reached with his agreement with Serbia.

Q. Very well. Is it true that on the 19th of May, 1999, in Bonn, ⁵⁵⁰⁶ Rugova demanded that the international community should not sell weapons to the KLA and that they needed to be disarmed? Yes or no.

A. No.

Q. Very well. You have an Agence France press report about that on the 19th of May.

Is it true that your party, on the 17th of May, 1999, said that it did not recognise the government in exile of Kosovar Albanians in Tirana led by the separatist KLA Hasim Thaci? That is an announcement of your party, or rather, a statement made by Rugova in Bonn. Is that correct or not?

A. The question of the provisional government was a matter of the delegation at Rambouillet, and Mr. Thaci was elected prime minister and he was described as Gerry Adams of Albanians, and he has contributed to the resolution of the Kosova question and he has contributed to the transformation of the KLA into TMK, the Kosova Protection Corps.

Q. That was not my question. I asked you whether your party had declared that it did not recognise that government. You are saying that is not true, though that is what it says here. Is it true that neither you nor Rugova dared to go to Tirana, as Paskal Milo, the head of the diplomacy, declared that Rugova did not come to Tirana because his security could not be guaranteed in Albania? Is that correct?

A. No.

Q. Well, tell me: Wasn't one of the conclusions of the talks between Rugova and Milutinovic precisely the formation of a joint government, a mixed government? ⁵⁵⁰⁷

A. When you are under arrest and when you are a hostage, you can say anything. We were only listeners. We were not party to that talk.

Q. And Rugova mentioned you as a candidate for the presidency of that future mixed government. Is there any truth in that?

A. This is your speculation, and I never even dreamed of this, let alone making a reality of it.

Q. Very well. And do you remember that during those talks with Milutinovic, when you said that you were under arrest, Rugova gave a present to Milan Milutinovic, a piece of crystal, a piece of mineral ore from Kosovo? Do you remember that?

A. I don't remember this.

Q. But that was even televised. One could see clearly the gifts. Very well. You don't remember.

You said that Rugova insisted on remaining in Kosovo throughout, and he says that he wanted to go abroad. Now, who is telling the truth: you or he?

A. Both of us are telling the truth.

Q. Well, if you say Rugova insisted on staying in Kosovo throughout, and he says that he wanted to go abroad, he asked to go abroad, so --

JUDGE MAY: That was at one stage, at the end. That was his evidence. So clearly there's some confusion in the question. Help us with this: Did there come a time when Mr. Rugova asked to go abroad?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There's no dispute that he did.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Rugova decided to stay in ⁵⁵⁰⁸ Kosova, because after we returned from Paris, we returned to Kosova, and the bombing started. And the Serbian forces, after the bombing started, their move was for all the Albanians to leave Kosova, and we were kept hostages, and we asked to leave Kosova to save ourselves. We're talking about a time when 700.000 or 800.000 people had left Kosova, and the ethnic cleansing imagined by the accused was already happening.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please, Mr. Merovci. As I see, I only have three minutes left. Mr. Merovci, from that television in Pristina, the journalist's name Fatmir Sahori, you stated to him, in those days, and that means a couple of days after the Rugova/Milosevic meeting, the following, and I am quoting you:

"Rugova has food, a telephone, and all this has been made available to him. After the bombing," I'm still quoting, "I visited, upon my request with Ljubisa Vasic, Pristina and the surroundings, the places where bombs fell, and I saw those craters in the centre of town and destroyed houses and the post office. My offices are destroyed. I couldn't recognise my town. The bombing has indeed contributed to the fleeing, because nobody wanted to leave their town. The bombing hastened up the fleeing of the population, and time will show, I claim emphatically, that the bombing of Kosovo is the main cause for the fleeing of the population."

This is a statement you made for television. Is that true?

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a politically created ⁵⁵⁰⁹ television, a fictitious one of the purpose of the statement was different. They took that opportunity and asked me several questions. And because of the time, I will hurry in my answer. I will apologise to the interpreters.

I have never said for a single moment that NATO has bombed. If -- I have said regarding the bombing that how can you explain the fleeing of Albanians to Montenegro when bombing is going on there too and that not a single Serb has left Vojvodina when they too are people like us? This is all I've said.

Q. Mr. Merovci, are you claiming that you didn't say this? Because we have a videotape. And I don't want to show it so as not to use up my time. You said, "I emphatically claim that the bombing of Kosovo is the main cause for the fleeing of the population."

As far as Montenegro is concerned, it was hardly bombed at all. Do you remember the slogans when they wrote "Bomb us as well because we we're not lepers," and do you know --

JUDGE MAY: Have you got the tape here?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will deliver it to you. I will supply you with it. Of course I will produce it in public too, which contains all these quotations of Mr. Merovci's from television. He said, "I categorically claim that the bombing of Kosovo is the main reason for the fleeing of the population."

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Mice.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, this is clearly a statement in a form that ought to be shown to the witness before he leaves the Tribunal. ⁵⁵¹⁰

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Where is it, Mr. Milosevic, this tape?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's in Belgrade. I don't have here the conditions required to be able to communicate properly. What I get I get at great speed. And I only have one telephone line to use, only one.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We understand all that. When did you get the tape here?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] When someone brings it. In a day perhaps.

JUDGE MAY: Can you get it here by Monday?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I suppose I can.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: The witness was going to go back this weekend, having been here a long time already. I don't know whether he's in a position to stay until Monday. It really is very unsatisfactory. This is a witness who was originally listed as our very first witness. He was listed as a witness about to give testimony for several days or weeks, and this is matter that should have been put to him earlier on in the cross-examination.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Now, Mr. Merovci, you've heard what's happened. Obviously you should have a chance of dealing with this particular tape and we should see it, and it should have been put to you originally and it hasn't been. What I shall suggest is this: that we obtain the tape and then we find a convenient time for you to come back to deal with it. Mr. Nice, perhaps you could make the arrangements.

MR. NICE: Yes. I'll discuss them with Mr. Merovci outside ⁵⁵¹¹ afterwards, although, of course, I'll have to suspend any discussion with him about the substance of the matter. I don't know if the Court is asking us to help with movement of the tape from Belgrade to here. The accused, of course, does now have the assistance of lawyers working for him.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: And typically I wouldn't expect to have to do that and indeed wouldn't expect the accused to want me to be involved in handling his exhibits, but of course if there is somebody coming back from Belgrade and if that person can act as a courier, I expect we'll be able to help.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, we shall direct that this tape be produced as soon as possible.

And perhaps you could have a word during the adjournment with the witness to see when it's convenient for him to come back.

MR. NICE: Certainly, yes. I'd be grateful for the opportunity of re-examining on two points, including one question about this interview.

JUDGE MAY: Let's deal with this. Are there any questions from the amicus?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'd like to make a comment if you allow me, Your Honour.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you. Perhaps I might need five minutes. Five minutes at the most.

JUDGE MAY: The next witness is going to take some time to prepare for. So if you would -- Mr. Tapuskovic, if you would deal with it now, we can then adjourn in order that the arrangements are made for the next ⁵⁵¹² witness. Can you deal with your questions now, please?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I want to say for my own part that you ought to have had that tape here. The Chamber has made every effort to ensure that you have facilities, including two legal associates. You ought to have had the tape here, and your not having had it here today is causing severe inconvenience to the Chamber. It's clearly a matter of importance.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, the information that this tape was found, I was informed of that only this morning. I knew about the statements made by Mr. Merovci because he gave similar statements when he was with me, visiting me with Rugova, that the police were feeding them, buying nappies, diapers for the babies, that they were taking care of them, and they were very grateful for all this care and assistance and protection, and they said the very same thing, but I did not know that my associates had in fact come up with the tape.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Microphone not activated]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, bring it here. Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have just one single area to cover, and in the English version of the statement, it is to be found on page 4, paragraph 3. I don't wish to repeat what Mr. Merovci said in that portion. I should just like to ask Mr. Merovci, if possible, to give me yes or no answers to each of my questions.

Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic: ⁵⁵¹³

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Merovci, I don't wish to repeat what it says in your statement. You talked about three options for which the Albanians were ready to solve the Kosovo status with; right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, you know that Yugoslavia ceased to exist in practical terms. Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina reached independence in 1992 and became members of the United Nations. Isn't that so?

A. Yes.

Q. Does that mean then that the first option after the previous Yugoslavia ceased to exist, that the first option was no longer acceptable to the Albanians, to your party, and Mr. Rugova?

A. Yes. This is why we had the option Kosovo independent. First republic in the context of the former federation.

Q. In 1992, were parliamentary and presidential elections held in your parts by the Albanians, the referendum and all the rest of it?

A. The referendum was held in 1991. The presidential and parliamentary elections in 1992, 24 May.

Q. What I'm interested in, Mr. Merovci is the following: Right after 1992 right up until 1999, was there on anybody's side, the Albanians, your party, Mr. Rugova, or anybody else, any other political party, was there any mention of any kind of autonomy, whether it was the 1974 one, 1996 one, and so on and so on -- forth, not to mention all the laws. Was there any mention at all of any kind of autonomy within Serbia or were there negotiations with anybody along those lines?

A. Following the constitutional declaration and the approval of the ^{5514 BLANK PAGE 5515} constitution, there has never been any talks either among the Albanians or between the Albanians and the Serbs about the status that you are talking about.

Q. And you wanted to negotiate independence, secession, and you were seeking procedure. You were looking for procedure by which to arrive at that end; is that right?

A. Under the constitution of 1974, Kosova was a state constituent element of the federation. Given the fact that the federation was broken up, military regime was established in Kosova and the people opted for an independent --

Q. [Previous translation continues]... given that answer.

A. Because it asks for that in the context of the dismemberment of the federation.

Q. I understood that, Mr. Merovci, but what I'm interested in is after 1992. After 1992, you didn't want to discuss any other solution but secession and independence; right?

A. No, because the question of secession made no sense, because how can you secede from a state that is not existing? This is an expression of the will of the people to have their natural rights realised. Independence was the only way to realise their natural rights. We didn't want to have a state for the sake of a state.

Q. Thank you. Now, did you, in 1998 - let's just take 1998 - on several occasions, sign demands made by Serbia in the name of Mr. Agani and Rugova because you were invited to attend certain meetings and negotiations or did you not? Yes or no? ⁵⁵¹⁶

A. There were some force invitations. Being chief of Protocol, I accepted those invitations. They were meetings based not on any principle at all.

Q. Were there any negotiations?

A. No, because the time when they came --

Q. Do you know Mr. Tanic? Did anybody from your party, Rugova or any other Albanian, did they ever discuss things of this kind with Mr. Tanic?

A. I personally never knew Mr. Tanic, and I don't think someone from us met him.

Q. And as Mr. Rugova's secretary, did Mr. Rugova negotiate with Mr. Tanic?

A. No.

Q. Now, Rambouillet was signed. After the signing of Rambouillet, was it your sole desire, that is to say the Albanian's sole desire, to achieve independence regardless of what it said in the document from Rambouillet, that this was not an option?

A. Every Albanian, wherever he lives in the world, supports independence of Kosova because that represents the will of the majority of the people. And this is the behest we have from the Jashari family who I think deserve the Nobel Prize for freedom, democracy.

Q. Do you know anything about an organisation called FARK, Forcet e Armatosura e Republikes se Kosoves? The Armed Forces of the Republic of Kosovo, FARK.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] This question, Your Honours.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have heard it in the media, but ⁵⁵¹⁷ I've never been involved in it and I have no comments to make on it.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Was that a military organisation as well?

A. I said I've never been involved in it, and I know of no details.

Q. Thank you. Because of the time restriction, I won't pursue this.

MR. NICE: Just two topics, very short. Re-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. First, in the meeting with Milutinovic, was anything said, regardless of whether there was any agreement, was anything said about some form of joint government?

A. During that meeting, I was the one who insisted most, actually, that those four people who were with us may -- I asked them to take -- to make the decision to let us leave Kosova right away. We discussed there also what you are asking me. It was in a very perfunctory discussion, but we were not actually concentrated on that issue.

Q. Very well.

A. Because we were hostages and arrested people, as I said.

Q. And was it you who initiated the discussion about joint government or was it Milutinovic or can't you remember?

A. Neither Mr. Rugova nor me were the initiators of any other topic than our release.

Q. My second question relates to this television programme of which it is said there is in existence a videotape recording. The accused put to you the following quotation as coming from your mouth, this is part of what he put to you: ⁵⁵¹⁸ "The bombing has indeed contributed to the fleeing because nobody wanted to leave their town. The bombing hastened up the fleeing of the population and time will show I claim emphatically, that the bombing of Kosovo is the main cause for the fleeing of the population." That's the quotation.

Perhaps you'd deal with this question as yes or no. Can you remember saying those words, in Albanian, no doubt, but those words yourself on a television programme? Yes or no?

A. No. I can say that I -- I can paraphrase that statement.

Q. Just a minute. Let's deal with it in a way I find it helpful. Were there any circumstances of which you can recall whereby you may have been asked questions along the lines of that quotation and that you would have acknowledged the accuracy of the questions? Just yes or no again to that.

A. I remember that I was surrounded by armed police and soldiers. It was a form of pressure. But nevertheless, I remember every word I said. And I may -- I said paraphrase it with 99.9 per cent accuracy.

Q. Right. So do you accept there is any truth in this suggestion that you said these things or that you acknowledge saying -- that you acknowledge the truth of such propositions in a television interview?

A. In the -- on television, it was an ad hoc, improvised station. It was called TV A. I didn't have a chance to look at it later, but I know it was broadcast two, three weeks afterwards. It was -- I was told that it was cut, it was revised, and I would kindly ask the distinguished Judges, because I insist on your expert -- looking at it very carefully, ⁵⁵¹⁹ because it is - parts of it may be made up. Some words of mine may be taken out of context and rephrased. I've said this. How can I answer to this question with two or three counter-arguments, that is, whether Albanians are leaving Kosova because of NATO and fear of bombing, why Albanians, I said, are going to another territory that is again being bombed but feel secure there. And the second I said why not a single Serb has left Vojvodina, Serbia, where they too are people like us. And I further said -- excuse me, Mr. Nice. I wish to say one last thing.

I said that indirectly, this can be understood or interpreted to mean that bombing might have had a role. This is more or less what I said. But at no moment did I say that bombing is the main reason for the movement of the people. And I say this in full responsibility.

Q. Thank you very much.

A. Because Albanians were looking forward to NATO bombing because they considered it the most humane mission of the century, which helped them realise their natural rights.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, it -- although my questions were in part directed at the possibility of the tape arriving and the witness being saved having to come back, it looks to me as though if the tape arrives the witness will have to come back, and we must make sure that we don't overlook the duty of the accused to produce the tape and then we'll get it translated or --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. And it may be that you can -- you might find a copy of it. ⁵⁵²⁰

MR. NICE: If possible.

JUDGE MAY: Look for a copy.

MR. NICE: Yes.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There are Albanians who have recorded that programme and have said to me that.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Mr. Merovci, subject to that matter, that concludes your evidence. However, we must ask you to come back on that particular narrow point of the tape. You could do so at a time which is convenient to you. Perhaps you could discuss the matter with the Prosecution to find a time which is suitable when we have a copy of the tape so that we may get to the bottom of what was said. We're going to adjourn now.

Mr. Milosevic, if you have information like that again, which is important and goes to the heart of any cross-examination, will you kindly signal at an early stage that you have it so that the position could be fully discussed. And you should have material such as that available in order to put it to the witness, and if you don't, you should tell us beforehand so that arrangements can be made.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just clarify this point? I don't know whether you heard me give an explanation that I was informed this morning of the existence of the tape. So therefore, it was not possible --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes. What I'm telling you -- yes, we heard the explanation. What I'm telling you is that if this sort of situation arises again, don't leave it to the last minute in cross-examination. ⁵⁵²¹ Tell us at the beginning or put it to the witness at the beginning so we can get matters resolved.

Meanwhile, we're going to adjourn now. Twenty minutes. At the end of today, there are some administrative matters which I wish to raise with the Prosecution, but we'll hear the witness first.

[The witness stands down]

--- Recess taken at 10.51 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.13 a.m.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In connection with the previous witness, may I just emphasise that the documents which I mentioned - and I dictated the numbers of the documents - that the opposite side disclosed, that this should be tendered into evidence as exhibits.

JUDGE MAY: We will certainly consider that. Now, let the witness take the declaration.

WITNESS: WITNESS K5

[Witness answered through interpreter]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes, if you would just introduce the witness, Ms. Romano, and then I have a warning to give him.

MS. ROMANO: Your Honours, I will also propose that any identification that might be asked of the witness to be done at the end of his testimony, in order to do it in an expeditious way. ⁵⁵²²

JUDGE MAY: I think we can go into closed session at the beginning. It's better that we identify him at the outset, in closed session.

[Private session]

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁵⁵²³ Page 5523 redacted, private session.

⁵⁵²⁴

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

[Open session]

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're now in open session.

JUDGE MAY: Witness K5, so that you may understand your position in this Court: We've seen the evidence which it's proposed that you should give. Some of it is liable to incriminate you of criminal offences. So that you can follow your position, it's this: that you may object, under the Rules, to making any statement which might tend to incriminate you. The Trial Chamber may, in those circumstances, compel you to answer - it would be a matter for the Chamber - but any evidence given and compelled in this way cannot be used as evidence in a subsequent prosecution against you for any offence other than that of giving false evidence or testimony.

Yes.

MS. ROMANO: ⁵⁵²⁵

Q. Witness, while your father was alive and working, there was an incident where he sacked another Albanian policeman? Yes or no.

A. Yes.

Q. What was his name and why was he sacked?

A. His name was Avdi Musa, from Ferizaj, and the reason for his dismissal was a document, a high school diploma, and for this reason he was dismissed from his job.

Q. What was the problem with the high school diploma?

A. It was a forgery.

Q. Did he ever come back to work in the police station again?

A. Yes. He came back when the Albanian policemen were dismissed from their work in 1989, 1999 [as interpreted]. He came back to the police station in Ferizaj. And after he came back to Ferizaj, he telephoned my father and my family and said, "I'm back in Ferizaj and I'm going to take my revenge on you and on your family." And from that moment on, he started to be maltreating me and my family.

Q. Witness, in which position did he come back?

A. He returned as an inspector of SUP in Ferizaj.

Q. Can you describe what kind of harassment that was done to you or to your family?

A. As I said, at the beginning he came to Ferizaj, and after a time -- and he took the weapons from my father, which he had with a licence, and he ransacked my house in general. And after a week, he came and summoned me, without any kind of reason at all, only because I was my father's son, because he had problems with my father. ⁵⁵²⁶

Q. Did you report the harassment to anybody?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone to Ms. Romano.

A. Yes.

MS. ROMANO: Sorry.

Q. Did you report the harassment to anybody?

A. Yes. After a lot of harassment from him, I decided to go to the police station in Ferizaj, and went to the commander, named Miomir Mitic, and I reported the case and said that we had a lot of problems with this man. He harassed me almost every week, and my family and my cousins and my extended family. And he said, "Okay. We can help you, but you have to help us too."

Q. Witness, can you describe Miomir Mitic?

A. Yes. Miomir Mitic was the police commander in Ferizaj.

Q. And what did he ask you to do?

A. He asked me to work as an informer for him.

Q. And as an informer, what kind of work did you do?

A. As an informer, at first I sent him information about drug dealers, about thieves, and ordinary crimes, just to get this harassment off my back.

Q. And did you report directly to Mitic?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you receive any payment for that?

A. Payment. I was paid in cigarettes and in money.

Q. And did the harassment from Musa stop?

A. No, this harassment did not stop, because, as far as I understood ⁵⁵²⁷ it, this too was organised by Mitic and the police inspectors, the Serbian police inspectors, to have me harassed, even as a police informer.

Q. In 1994, you escaped to Germany. Is it true?

A. Yes. In 1994, I fled to Germany because I -- I couldn't put up with this any longer. I didn't like this business. So I decided to flee to Germany as an asylum seeker, and I went for six months.

Q. After you came back to Kosovo - this was in 1995, I believe - you continued to work for Mitic?

A. Yes.

Q. And what happened in May 1999, Witness?

A. In 1996, there was an incident in which I was in a cafe with a friend of Avdi Musa, and we had a fight in the cafe because of the provocations to which I was subjected. And then Avdi Musa and Azem Haliti, inspectors in Ferizaj, beat me for three hours on end only so that I would confess to lies. And they accused me of supposedly beating a person called Hajrush Rrysha from the village of Varosh near Ferizaj, allegedly that I had stolen 500 marks from him. And then I was sent to prison for six months. And the Judge, Danica Marinkovic, then released me as innocent.

Q. So did you have a trial?

A. Yes. I was convicted, but I was -- I went on trial, but in the end I was declared innocent.

Q. When you say you were convicted, Witness, you spent some time in prison and then you went to trial. At the end of the trial, what was the result? ^{5528 BLANK PAGE 5529}

A. The result of the trial was that I was acquitted and that I -- I had not stolen anything, because Musa Avdi and Azem Haliti alleged I had stolen 500 marks, and this came out as not true, only I had got involved in a fight.

Q. Witness, did you meet someone while in prison?

A. Yes. I met a Serb called Dejan Stojkovic from the village of Balic near Ferizaj, who had the pseudonym of Crni, which means "black."

Q. Can you give a description of this man?

A. He was a member of Arkan's Tigers and had been involved in the war in Croatia and Bosnia, in the wars.

Q. After you left gaol, did you continue to work as a police informant?

A. Yes. We continued working but separately, he on one side and I on another.

Q. So what was Stojkovic doing?

A. Stojkovic worked as an informer for Mitic but by himself. And I also worked similarly but also by myself.

Q. And in 1998, did you and Stojkovic open a business together?

A. Yes. We opened a cafe and started to work, working in a cafe called Mimosa, and we started a business. With the money we earned, we bought a black Zastava 128 car, and we started working. It was a cafe and a bar. But after a few months, the policeman, Jashar, from Vitia joined us.

Q. Witness, in 1998, you received a call from Mitic. Do you remember that? ⁵⁵³⁰

A. Yes. In 1998, we got some information on the phone that we had to go to the police station at Ferizaj. And Crni and I went to the police station, and he went first and I went five minutes later.

Q. Where was the police station located?

A. The police station in Ferizaj is on the road to Shtime near the army building, near what was called the JNA building.

Q. And did you go see Mitic?

A. Yes. We went to the police station commander, to Mitic, the Ferizaj police station commander. That is Dejan and myself. We went to him.

Q. Was Mitic alone in his office?

A. Yes. Mitic was by himself. There was also a store -- a warehouseman called Vlada who had his own job to do.

Q. And did you meet anybody else while you were in the police station?

A. Yes, later, about an hour later. But first we had a conversation just with Mitic.

Q. So what was the conversation with Mitic?

A. At first they gave Dejan and me a document like a sort of permit, and they gave us a TT pistol, 7.68, and he gave us one each, and then we, in the course of this conversation -- and in the course of this conversation ...

Q. You can continue. What did you discuss?

A. We discussed about how Mitic had assembled a list of various things, various tasks that we had to do. ⁵⁵³¹

Q. Can you explain? What kind of list was that and what were the tasks?

A. The list was about the liquidation of Albanians, about who was financing the KLA, who had brothers in the KLA, and point out people for liquidation, about throwing bombs, throwing Chinese grenades in Albanian business premises, explosions, burning houses, jobs of that kind.

Q. And who compiled the list, Witness?

A. The list was prepared by Mitic.

Q. Why did he want to use Chinese grenades?

A. He wanted to use Chinese grenades because at that time, the KLA used this kind of ammunition. And his idea was to use these things in order to blame the KLA for these incidents rather than the Serbian police.

Q. What was the proposed involvement of Stojkovic and yourself in this plan?

A. I don't understand the question.

Q. Sorry, Witness. What did Mitic want you and Stojkovic to do?

A. Mitic wanted me to go as -- to go as an informer because I was from Ferizaj and I knew the streets and I knew people. And my job was merely to point out people for liquidation and for bomb throwing and jobs of this kind that were on Mitic's list.

Q. Witness, you said that you met -- you met other people also when you were in the police station. That was one hour later. Can you explain that?

A. One hour later, we went to the office of the SUP chief called ⁵⁵³² Bogoljub Bogi from Sterpce, living in Ferizaj. And he was head of the state security from Belgrade, but he lived in Prishtina somewhere, and his name was Jashanin. This was the other person that I met.

Q. Were they in uniform?

A. No. They were in plain clothes but Mitic was in uniform.

Q. What happened after? Did Mitic ask you and Stojkovic to accompany him to some place?

A. Then we stayed with Bogic, and we went to Prishtina.

Q. The three of you went to Pristina?

A. Yes.

Q. What were you doing in Pristina?

A. We went there because this was on Mitic's list. And we went to the commander of the special units for Kosova, SAJ, and we went to the police station. And his name, I'm not sure about it, but I think his name was Dragan.

Q. And why did he need to go to Pristina? Did he need an approval?

A. He wanted to go to the commander to get permission to do these jobs.

Q. Did he also mention collecting any equipment?

A. Yes.

Q. After you arrived in Pristina, where did you go?

A. When we arrived in Prishtina, we went to the commander of the police.

Q. And what is it -- where is it located?

A. This is in -- near the stadium, near the Boro and Ramiz shopping ⁵⁵³³ centre. The police station was known for short as "92."

Q. And did you meet the commander there?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you describe him?

A. When we went there, Mitic introduced me to this commander, and he said that this is the commander of the police in Kosova and of the special units, and said that he had taken part in the operation in Prekaz involving Adem Jashari, and said that he'd also brought a woman from Ferizaj called Besa and said to us, "Can you find this woman for us? We want to put her on television." It was something to do with fighting in Prekaz.

Q. Do you know what this special police was, the SAJ?

A. They were a special unit, what they called anti-terrorist unit.

Q. And was he in civilian clothes?

A. Yes.

Q. And what was discussed there?

A. All these jobs were discussed, and there was another question of giving us KLA uniforms to go onto the Shtime-Suhareke road to talk to journalists from Slovenia and Croatia and foreign countries, and to take their video cameras and to loot them, and we had orders also to kill.

Q. Who was proposing this?

A. This was suggested by Mitic.

Q. And was it approved?

A. No, this was not approved. No. It was said that this had to be left until later. ⁵⁵³⁴

Q. And did Mitic explain all the targets to the SAJ commander?

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Did he read out all the names listed in the list of targets?

A. First of all, Xhafer Morina, Metar Morina, Agim Ibrahimi, Shaban Hashani were to be liquidated.

Q. And was the plan approved?

A. And also Ilmi Recica, and various other people whose names I don't remember.

Q. We'll go into detail with the names after, Witness. Was the plan approved?

A. Yes.

Q. And did the commander provide any equipment?

A. Yes. We received a KLA uniform, an M-45 gun, Chinese grenades, KLA emblems, Tritol explosives, and we took these with us and went to Ferizaj. And I later went home, and Dejan Stojkovic took these things to his own apartment.

Q. Witness, the list contains several targets, and Stojkovic and yourself then started doing the tasks as listed, and you continued throughout 1998. Some of the targets were completed in 1998 and some were done during the conflict in 1999; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Do you remember what was your first work?

A. In 1998, it was my first job to go to Manastirice and to leave a letter, which I wrote in Albanian, and this letter had the emblem of the KLA on it and it said that Serbs could no longer use these buses. And ⁵⁵³⁵ then we wrote this letter and put it in the house of the owner of the buses, because he had private buses. And Dejan, at that moment, threw petrol and burnt the buses.

Q. Do you remember what was the second one?

A. The second job was to go to a certain street, where there was a mini market, a small private store, and I went and stood in front of it, with Dejan Stojkovic, and took those goods of value from the store and then set fire to the store.

Q. Why was that store in the list?

A. This store was owned by someone from Sllatine, somebody from Sllatine, in Kacanik municipality, called Ruzhdi Rudi, who had been giving money to the KLA.

Q. Was Hamdi Komuna in the list?

A. Yes. Mitic said that Hamdi Komuna was rich, and he was on the list because he too had supposedly financed the KLA. And we went to his house, and he had a BMW of the latest model in front of his house, and Dejan threw petrol on this and set fire to it and then we fled.

Q. Do you remember Agim Ibrahimi?

A. Agim Ibrahimi, as Mitic said, was an organiser of demonstrations, and he was a kind of patriot. He supported the Albanians. And he worked as a guard in one of the Albanian schools. And Dejan was supposed to liquidate him.

Q. And what happened?

A. After a few days, we went with his black 128 car and kept watch on him. We followed him, because he was on this list for liquidation. And ⁵⁵³⁶ he was in a tea shop on the road to Gjilan, sitting, and we followed him, because we knew where his house was. He lived in the new neighbourhood near the kindergarten. And there was a meadow there, and then we waited for him there. And he was approaching. It was night. But he was in the company of another person and a dog. And Dejan was getting ready to kill both these people, but I said, "We don't know this other person. We can't kill both of them," because we didn't have instructions to kill this other person, but only Agim Ibrahimi. And Dejan became annoyed, and we abandoned this mission.

Q. Witness, during this time there was any other person working with you and Stojkovic, or was it just the two of you?

A. There were just the two of us. There were others, and there were more of them later.

Q. Was Shaban Hashani in the list?

A. Yes, Shaban Hashani was on the list, and Mitic said that he was headmaster of the technical school in Ferizaj. He was member of the Kosova Democratic League and had taken part in a lot of meetings. He was at the parliament in Kacanik that proclaimed the constitution of the Republic of Kosova. And so he was on the list for liquidation. So we went to him, and in front of his yard he had a -- and then we waited in front of his yard. He had a WC in front of his yard. And we waited for half an hour. His wife came out and his son came out, but he never came out, and so we went back, and without doing this job.

Q. What about Ilmi Recica?

A. Mitic said about Ilmi Recica that he had been convicted for ⁵⁵³⁷ political crimes. He was an Albanian patriot. And he had information that Ilmi Recica was a KLA commander for the village of Jezerc, and he had his photograph, and he had had orders to have this person killed too, or a member of his family. And Dejan and I went to this person too, and we waited in front of his house, and we waited for an hour. And some women came out, and I don't know if it was his mother. But no, none of the men ever came out, so we didn't do the job.

Q. Witness, there were a couple of bars in the list. Do you remember that?

A. Yes, there were bars, and our job was to throw Chinese grenades, such as in the Bolero bar, where the LDK members used to sit, as well as the Casablanca bar. And the plan was to throw Chinese grenades there, only because they were frequented by Albanians --

Q. And did you --

A. -- and to ascribe the killings to the KLA. Would you repeat your question again?

Q. And did you do the jobs?

A. We went to the Casablanca cafe and we planted some Tritol explosives there, but it didn't explode because the fuse got wet. It was raining. And Dejan went and took the fuse and took the explosives away.

Q. What happened to Afrim Musliu?

A. Afrim Musliu. Mitic had information that he was a member of the KLA. And his house was on the Nerodima Road in Ferizaj, and I had orders to go to him and see if Afrim was there. And Dejan looted his house inside. And we went to his house and waited at his door with automatic ⁵⁵³⁸ weapon, but we didn't find anybody there. And we were masked. And then we disappeared.

Q. There were also travel agencies in the list. Can you explain about that?

A. Yes. There were also travel agencies on the list, because Mitic had information that at a tea shop near the mosque, near the old mosque in Ferizaj, there was a picture of a karate club in Switzerland and there were some signatures on this. And Mitic had information that there was a travel agency with members of the KLA. And I went and I took away this photograph at night and took it to Mitic.

Q. Did you steal anything from the travel agency?

A. The order was to set fire to the travel agency, with its computers, and to take objects of value.

Q. And did you take value from the places?

A. Yes, we tried. Yes, and we did. We did take these things. We did what Mitic said. We did this job in a travel agency near the mosque.

Q. Can you describe what happened, one example? Do you remember one of the travel agencies that you worked?

A. Yes. The travel agency belonged to somebody called Vladi, and we stole the money that was there and we destroyed the other contents of this premises.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. K5, in cases in which you were ordered to liquidate somebody, you never succeeded in those missions, did you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I didn't have orders to kill. I merely had orders to point out people. Dejan had orders to kill. ⁵⁵³⁹

JUDGE KWON: And all you did was that you went to their places and waited for them to appear, and they didn't appear, so you gave up everything; is that it?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues] ... again? Yes. Thank you.

MS. ROMANO:

Q. Witness, do you remember any case where you were asked to liquidate or there were people in the list that you had to liquidate during 1998 or even 1999? Do you remember if they were at least killed, not by you, by maybe by one of the others, other people that accompanied you?

A. Yes. Some were killed in 1999. For example, in Nerodima village, lower Nerodima, there was some who was lower on the list by Mitic was killed. He was a patriot. He was a KLA. He was on the side of KLA, and he was liquidated. Not by Mitic himself but by other persons.

Q. We will go into 1999 after. During 1998, after doing the jobs, did you used to report back to Mitic?

A. Yes, Yes. We did report back to him about the jobs.

Q. And what did he do?

A. Nothing. He gave us cigarettes and drinks. He was happy. Then he had his own team. After, for example, a bus was burned or a house was burned, he sent his police team to conduct investigations and to identify that this was not done by a human hand but it was an accident, you know. This is what he did. ⁵⁵⁴⁰

Q. So he conducted investigations for the places that you worked?

A. Yes.

Q. And what was the result of all the investigations?

A. The result was that allegedly they were accidents. For example, a short circuit or something may have caused, let's say, a certain arson in a house. I mean, the burning of a certain house and not perpetrated by a person.

Q. Was any incident blamed by the KLA?

A. Yes. Yes. In Kacanik, there was fighting there. I was also present there.

Q. Witness, you didn't understand my question. Was, as a result of the investigation, was the KLA blamed -- was the KLA appointed as the organisation or the person who did the work?

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Was there any document given to you by Mitic identifying you and Stojkovic as working for the police?

A. Yes.

Q. What kind of document?

A. It was a kind of letter, authorisation with my name, my last name, the number of my pistol. There was a signature by -- Belgrade signature, and a seal, and the signature of Mitic. It was to provide us with some security. When we left Ferizaj if the local police or someone might intercept us at night, we have to show this authorisation for them to leave us alone.

Q. Do you still have this document? ⁵⁵⁴¹

A. No. Out of fear that someone might find it on me, I burned this document.

Q. Witness, do you know a group called Black Hand?

A. I've heard about that when I was in that coffee bar, a Serb police was there showed, Jashar Jashoviq, showed -- told me about this group. He said to me that they were Serb policemen and that one of them was called Dimitri and that he had come from Serbia. I know the other members by sight. I know one of them had worked in the police station in my village, and he was a member of this organisation. And I saw them in that coffee shop --(redacted).

Q. Was the Serb police who pointed out Dimitri for you the same one that was in -- that you met while you were in the police station with Mitic?

A. Yes. Yes, he was the one.

Q. Do you know what the Black Hand -- what did they do?

A. Yes. This Black Hand organisation was set up to kill Albanians. Not to engage in politics but only to do short work of Albanians, to commit atrocities, to strike fear among the Albanians, to force them to leave their places, their homes. This is what they did.

Q. And were they present in Ferizaj in 1998?

A. Yes, they were present in Ferizaj in 1998.

MS. ROMANO: Your Honour, you said that you would like some matters to be raised, and I'm getting into 1999 now. So --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. That would be a convenient time. We'll go on to 1999 on Monday. ^{5542 BLANK PAGE 5543} Witness K5, we're going to adjourn now. Would you please be back at 9.00 on Monday to conclude your evidence. Would you remember this during the adjournment, not to speak to anybody about your evidence, and that does include members of the Prosecution team. Now, you'll just have to remain there while we deal with some other matters first. Mr. Nice, I mentioned some administrative matters, and it may be convenient to deal with them now for next week.

The first concerns Wednesday, the 29th of May, a date on which you have, I see, listed a witness, General Maisonneuve. The first point to be made about that day is that we shall be starting late. I don't know if you've seen the notice. The accused apparently has a dental appointment. So we're not starting until half past ten.

Now, that affects the day because, as I understand it, the General is only available that day.

MR. NICE: It so happens today that I received disquieting news from Canada that he's now not able to come that day because again as presently advised, the confirmation letter or similar sent to the address that has always been appropriate for the general before is now said not to be appropriate and for some reason he has not been notified. We first heard of this this morning.

Until the time gap between here and Canada allows us to telephone, we can't take matters further. We are dealing with it as soon as we can this afternoon, having been clearly understood by Mr. Ryneveld, whom I think spoke to the general a week or so ago, that he was coming on that day. ⁵⁵⁴⁴

JUDGE MAY: Well, that obviously is a matter which will have to be resolved. Meanwhile, we have had the opportunity of looking at his statement, which it was -- your application should be treated under Rule 92 bis. There are matters in it which we feel should be dealt with by way of live evidence. For instance, what he says about Racak and what he says about the VJ chain of command. Those seem to me to be matters which it is appropriate for him to give live, although there may be other matters which he can deal with by way of 92 bis. So I mention that, although it may not now be as urgent as it appeared to be originally.

MR. NICE: Well, yes. We'll have to wait and see on that. And of course any revisions arising to the witness list from his definite non-availability will be communicated to all the parties simply as soon as I can.

JUDGE MAY: The next matter concerns an expert report --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE MAY: -- an expert report which we've had from Mr. Coo. I hope I pronounce his name rightly. I've had a chance of looking at it, and really, three points arise for you to consider. The first, I can see no details of his qualifications or curriculum vitae, so if you would supply those --

MR. NICE: Certainly.

JUDGE MAY: -- to support your application. We'll have to consider, I think, whether it's appropriate that he should make the conclusions which he does in the part that I've seen. I understand there's a second part of that report which may be more controversial ⁵⁵⁴⁵ because that does appear to contain conclusions. And in that connection, perhaps I can remind you of the decision of this Trial Chamber, as it was then constituted, in Kordic about a Mr. Cigar and his proposed evidence. The third matter for your consideration is this: that he gives evidence or deals in his report with such things as the VJ and the MUP and the chains of command and also the constitutional position. What I don't understand, and perhaps you could deal with it in due course, is why you are also going to call a military expert, a constitution expert, and a MUP expert. Perhaps you could give some thought to those matters.

MR. NICE: Certainly. Of course they have already been given thought, and it will be a useful opportunity next week to explain our thinking on them.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. And in connection with that, we would wish to have the amicus's submissions on Mr. Coo as soon as possible. Finally, it would obviously be convenient to deal with as many administrative matters as we can possibly next Friday, at the end of the week, and we should set some time aside for that.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, yes. And I've been helpfully provided with an advanced copy of the Scheduling Order which will have to be dealt with next week.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: There's the issue of the witness who would, and the Prosecution proposition, be able to summarise the Racakic. And I have another much more general issue in relation to witnesses I was going to raise in any event next week. That will probably fit conveniently with ⁵⁵⁴⁶ the discussion that will be generated by the Scheduling Order where it refers to insider witnesses. So a quite general topic I want to raise about that, all of which may take some time, I think.

JUDGE MAY: We ought, therefore, to set aside at least an hour next Friday.

MR. NICE: Yes. The discussion about a summarising witness might conveniently be taken earlier in the week.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: It can be dealt with quite shortly because the arguments have been rehearsed in writing several times before, but that argument would have to be taken before the relevant witness is called to the stand.

May I before, Your Honour closes court, assuming you're about just to do that, invite the accused, through the Court, to give little further consideration to the method by which he produces exhibits? Again this morning he lists some numbers and then, as I saw from the transcript when I returned after the second session had started, requests that they become exhibits. He's done that once or twice before and we're still dealing with the backlog. Of course a number does enable us -- a serial number does enable us to draw an exhibit down. It doesn't enable us to do it immediately. We can't simply produce it like a rabbit from the hat and hand it to the witness.

If the accused would be good enough to make those documents available either in copy or in sufficient numbers before he asks a witness about them or even if he gives them to us or possibly to the Registry ⁵⁵⁴⁷ before he starts cross-examining, we will try to ensure that they are copied so that we don't have this problem of a backlog of decisions building up, which we probably pretty nearly all forgotten about were it not for the good services of my case managers who industriously remind me that there are these outstanding issues.

So I'd invite the accused's further cooperation on this if he would be so good.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, I will be good enough to supply you with a list of the exhibits that I have requested. And as I have understood that my dental appointment on Wednesday is an obstacle, I shall ask them to make another appointment for me so this should not be an obstacle to hearing General Maisonneuve, because I do have -- I would really like to have the opportunity of cross-examining him. I have this fervent desire.

So can my dental appointment be put forward or put back or put at any other time? Because I do not want this to be the reason, even if I don't go and see the dentist at all that week. But I have the fervent desire to cross-examine and hear General Maisonneuve, and I hope you won't deprive me of that.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We'll adjourn now. Monday morning, 9.00.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.17 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 27th day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.